Originally Posted by Abster2core
- How does one make a vaccine to prevent a non-existent virus?
- How does one make an antivirus software for a computer that has been impervious to viruses?
- How would one prove that an antivirus software works if you don't have a computer with the virus to test it on?
- How would one be able to justify any price for something that does nothing for nothing?
- And who would buy it?
- How do they do it in the Windows world?
- Now that statement is so stupid, I'm not even going to reply.
- Again, why don't you ask, say, Kaspersky?
- Here's an idea. Why don't you ask Apple why they posted the article in the first place if it's worthless. You are obviously so much smarter than they are.
- Someone who's not as arrogant as you are? "Impervious," right.
Originally Posted by Jimzip
Ok y'know what, that is a nutty idea
I couldn't stand paying more to install some bloated CPU hog for viruses that are currently borderline non-existent, especially on top of my .mac/mm subscription.
And just in case I'm wrong here, don't Apple security updates come out often enough? I seem to get one every few weeks, that's more than fast enough for me. Apple seems to be amazingly fast in their response to threats.
This virus thing at the moment is just being blown out of proportion.Edit: Hey I just remembered, the old .mac subscription used to come with the ever (un)useful 'Virex', did it not?
Sounds like you formed your opinion based on a few bad experiences with Virex and maybe Norton. Good AV programs aren't CPU or RAM hogs. Even NAV isn't as bad as it used to be. The review at Macworld says, "Previous versions of NAV were notorious resource hogs, and version 11 addresses that flaw. Scanning my test Mac’s roughly 410,000 files (give or take a GIF here and there) had little to no impact on performance. Surfing the Web, checking e-mail, and listening to music with iTunes were as snappy as I’d expect on my 2.16GHz Core Duo MacBook Pro."
Apparently, it slipped your notice that I suggested Apple write their own. Who would know best about how to protect an OS than the people who wrote it? And if you don't trust Apple to write it, why do you even trust their OS to begin with?
Originally Posted by l008com
I've never had a virus or any sort of malware or even hack on my Mac. I'd say the speed of security updates is adequate.
If you check the archives, you'll find at least one article about a vulnerability that wasn't patched for over a year.
I don't run AV software and probably won't in the foreseeable future. But the way some of you self-described Mac "experts" tsk tsk that some less knowledgeable users might want some additional security and peace of mind makes you look like the stereotypical Mac fanboys, especially the nincompoops who tout that OS X is "impervious" to malware. No OS is perfect and invulnerable.
Originally Posted by kim kap sol
Not really...the KB was simply old. It was a KB written in the late OS 9, early OS X days.
Is everyone incapable of reading?
Apparently, you are. Check the Google cache on the pulled article. Apple specifically recommends Intego VirusBarrier X5 and NAV 11 in the article. Those are current versions released in 2008, not in the "late OS 9, early OS X days."